1-ear, 2-ear, 3-ear meetings

Not every meeting needs your full attention. Saying that out loud feels a little transgressive, but I think most people already know it's true.

I categorize meetings into three levels of engagement, and I call them 1-ear, 2-ear, and 3-ear.

1-ear means I'm half-present. I'm there in case something goes sideways, but I'm likely also doing other work. One ear open for my name or something that sounds off the rails, but most of my attention on other work. Status updates I've already read. Meetings where I'm a courtesy invite.

2-ear means I'm engaged, but interruptible. I'm tracking the conversation, I'll contribute when relevant, but I might divert my attention briefly if something urgent comes up. Technical discussions, backlog grooming, design reviews: the meetings where I'm a participant, not the driver.

3-ear means I'm fully there. Body, mind, and spirit. No multitasking, no glancing at Slack. 1:1s, retrospectives, difficult conversations. These get my whole self.

The reason this framework matters isn't just personal productivity. It's about shared language. When a team has a common vocabulary for this, you can say "I'm going to 1-ear this meeting" and people know what that means. You can design meeting agendas around it. You can stop performing attentiveness in meetings that don't require it, and actually show up fully in the ones that do.

Since the world shifted to a primarily virtual model 6 years ago, I've observed a particular challenge in virtual meetings: the tool you use to attend is the same tool that interrupts you. Research, including a well-known study out of the University of Essex, has found that in a physical setting, having a phone or other technology in view, even untouched, reduces relationship quality, trust, and empathy during meaningful conversations. Now that most meetings require us to use that technology as the tool of engagement itself, a true 3-ear meeting requires not just presence, but significantly more intentionality.